Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada; Department of Ophthalmology and Vision Sciences, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
Am J Ophthalmol. 2020 Oct;218:120-127. doi: 10.1016/j.ajo.2020.05.005. Epub 2020 May 11.
To evaluate the efficacy of slit lamp breath shields to prevent droplet spray from a simulated sneeze.
Experimental study to test the effectiveness of personal protective equipment.
The nozzle of a spray gun was adjusted to angularly disperse a mist of colored dye that approximated a patient sneezing on a dimensionally accurate cardboard slit lamp model. The designs of 6 commercially available breath shields and 1 breath shield repurposed from a plastic container lid were tested. Each breath shield was sprayed in a standardized fashion 3 times, and the amount of overspray was compared to spray with no shield and quantified. The surface area that was sprayed was calculated using a commercially available software with color range function. The average percentage of overspray of each breath shield was computed in comparison to the control.
The breath shields ranged in surface area from 116 to 924 cm, and the amount of overspray varied from 54% to virtually none. Larger breath shields offered better protection than smaller ones. Breath shields attached to the objective lens arm were better barriers than those of comparable size hung by the oculars. A repurposed plastic lid breath shield, 513 cm, was slightly curved toward the examiner's face and allowed only 2% overspray. The largest breath shield (924 cm) hung near the oculars and prevented essentially all overspray.
The performance of different designs of breath shields was variable. Even high-functioning shields should be used in conjunction with personal protective equipment including masks, goggles, and gloves and handwashing. Ideally patients should also wear a face mask during all slit lamp examinations.
评估裂隙灯呼吸罩防止模拟喷嚏飞沫喷溅的效果。
测试个人防护设备效果的实验研究。
调整喷枪喷嘴，使彩色染料雾近似于患者向尺寸准确的纸板裂隙灯模型打喷嚏。测试 6 种市售呼吸罩和 1 种由塑料容器盖改装的呼吸罩的设计。每种呼吸罩以标准方式喷涂 3 次，比较并量化过喷量。使用带颜色范围功能的商业软件计算被喷涂的表面积。将每个呼吸罩的过喷平均百分比与对照进行比较。
呼吸罩的表面积从 116 到 924cm 不等，过喷量从 54%到几乎没有。较大的呼吸罩比较小的提供更好的保护。附在物镜臂上的呼吸罩比通过目镜悬挂的类似大小的呼吸罩更能起到屏障作用。一个改装的塑料盖呼吸罩，513cm，略微向检查者的面部弯曲，仅允许 2%的过喷。最大的呼吸罩（924cm）挂在目镜附近，基本上防止了所有的过喷。
不同设计的呼吸罩的性能各不相同。即使是高性能的呼吸罩也应与包括口罩、护目镜和手套以及洗手在内的个人防护设备一起使用。理想情况下，所有裂隙灯检查都应让患者佩戴面罩。
